Corby Morrisons slasher on controversial IPP sentence 'unlikely to ever be released' after serving 13 years for a minimum three-year jail term

A Corby man who served thirteen years in jail for two robberies during which he got away with just £16 has been sent back to prison after cutting the neck of a shopworker with a Stanley knife.

Bryan Foley – also known as Brian - admitted to being ‘hammered’ when he walked into Corby Morrisons in February this year and tried to steal bottles of booze. When he was confronted, he cut the neck of a shop worker and then threatened a security guard with an axe.

He was jailed on Thursday (October 27) by a judge at Northampton Crown Court.

But because Foley had been handed an indeterminate Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence back in 2007 after two violent shop robberies involving a gun and a machete, Recorder Stuart Sprawson said it is unlikely he will now ever be released from jail.

He is thought to be one of around 600 British prisoners who served a decade or more over their IPP original minimum tariff.

The 43-year-old had been released from prison in 2021 after serving 13 years inside for a minimum three-year sentence imposed by Leicester Crown Court for the two robberies which netted him just £16 to feed his drug addiction.

After his release, he had moved in with his mum, who was recovering from lung cancer, in Farndale Avenue, Corby, and had initially done well, managing to stay off the Class-A drugs that had blighted his life.

But after trying many times to get a job and failing, he began drinking.

He started a new relationship and began to get to know his teenage daughter who had been just six months old when was first sent to prison, but struggled with feelings of isolation and uselessness.

On February 2, he left his home and went to Oakley Vale Tesco Extra where he stole five bottles of spirits worth £114.

He then walked the few hundred metres to Morrisons in Oakley Road and was spotted by a checkout supervisor in the spirits aisle with a trolley full of bottles and a backpack. The worker thought that Foley was potential shoplifter so kept an eye on him.

Foley then tried to walk out with his backpack full of bottles. Prosecuting, Sinjin Bulbring, said: “He said ‘get away’ and started to walk around the victim to the exit door.

"The supervisor asked to search his bag and both took a step forward.

"The victim saw the defendant’s arm move towards him before the defendant moved to the exit door.”

The shop worker gave chase but then was alerted to blood on his neck and realised he’d sustained a 3cm knife wound.

As Foley arrived at the exit, he was confronted by a security guard and took an axe out of his bag which he waved at him before making his getaway.

Police recognised him from CCTV and he was arrested.

Wearing a blue tracksuit top, a forlorn Foley spoke in court only to plead guilty to the charges before him.

He admitted a section 20 grievous bodily harm offence, being in possession of a Stanley knife and an axe, and to the theft of bottles of alcohol from both Morrisons and Tesco.

The court heard he had 22 convictions for 79 previous offences.

A victim personal statement read to the court said that the shopworker had been in pain for days and that his confidence had been affected.

He said he had been left ‘extremely nervous around strangers’ after the attack.

In mitigation, the court heard Foley had engaged with the probation service but was ‘hammered’ at the time of the incident.

Barrister Gary Short said although his client was drinking, he’d managed to stay off drugs, adding: “It was his drug addiction that had led to him receiving that IPP sentence. He was managing to stay away from his old associates and was building a relationship with his daughter."

Recorder Stuart Sprawson said that the normal range of prison sentence for this type of offence would be between one and three years. He jailed Foley for thirty months.

He said: "Had it not been for the IPP I could have gone far beyond the range.

"But it’s highly unlikely you’ll ever be released, at least not for many, many years.

"Some people might think I’m going soft but if it wasn’t for the IPP I wouldn’t have treated you as leniently.”

What did Bryan Foley do back in 2006?

Foley was a 28-year-old class-A drug addict when he walked into Martin’s Newsagents on the Danesholme estate in the early hours of November 24, 2006 ,and held an imitation handgun to the heads of two staff members. He threatened to shoot them but got away with just £16 from the till.

Then on September 10, 2007, he walked into Thresher’s in Uppingham and held a machete to a shop assistant’s throat. She later told police she thought she was going to be killed. He took the till but couldn’t open it so left it in the grounds of Uppingham School.

In November 2007, he appeared before Judge Michael Pert QC at Leicester Crown Court who gave him a three-year minimum jail term as part of a life-long IPP sentence.

What is an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence?

IPPs were introduced in 2005 to protect the public from offenders whose jail terms did not merit a life sentence.

They were handed out at a rate of more than 800 a year. Offenders sentenced to an IPP were set a minimum tariff – in Foley’s case three years – which they had to spend in prison before applying to the parole board for release.

After release, offenders had to be on licence for at least ten years although many were given life licences, meaning they had to fulfil strict conditions to avoid being returned immediately to prison at any point in their life.

IPPs were scrapped in 2012 because they were deemed inherently unfair to prisoners who could be kept behind bars indefinitely.

But they were not retrospectively removed, and last month it was revealed that there were still 3,000 people subject to an IPP.

Last month, the House of Commons Justice Committee called IPPs ‘irredeemably flawed’ and called for all offenders on them to be re-sentenced.

Foley’s barrister Gary Short said in court that his client had been given an IPP at their height, in 2007. He said: “Everybody thought they were a wonderful thing. He’s served the best part of thirteen years in prison. It wasn’t until year 10 that he was able to go on his first course to prepare for release.

"He was volunteering cleaning headstones in a local graveyard, but he didn’t have employment. As soon as an employer sees an IPP they’re not particularly interested in giving you a job.

"He had feelings of worthlessness, and no structure in his life.

“When his mother was asleep and his partner was at work, he turned to drink. It doesn’t take much for him to feel the effects of drink because his system has been so drug-ravaged.

"Probation were aware of the alcohol consumption but he didn’t tell them the full extent because he was scared of recall to prison.

"Now he’s been recalled to prison he’ll be there long after this (three year) sentence runs out.

"He’s trying hard to demonstrate he’s safe for release.

"He’s secured a job cleaning the prison wing and he is voluntarily monitored for drug consumption. He was allowed out for his father’s funeral when he recently passed away. Such arrangements are very rare.

“There’d normally be a four-man detail but he had a one-man detail and was allowed to stay for a while after the funeral, such is the level of trust.”

While sentencing Foley, Recorder Stuart Sprawson told him: “You found it impossible to find a job. Your previous convictions led to doors being slammed in your face. It must have had a great impact on you.

"The result was that you had feelings of worthlessness and being useless. You didn’t use the opportunities you had to get support and assistance.

In his BBC R4 show Law in Action last week, renowned lawyer and legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg highlighted the case of a man who served ten years behind bars on an IPP for stealing a mobile phone.

Former supreme court justice Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood has described IPPs as a ‘stain on the justice system’. He said in the House of Lords of IPP prisoners: “All these are to be regarded as victims of an unjust scheme, desperately needing far greater help than most of them have currently been getting in order to secure and then to retain, at long last, their liberty.”